From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Abbott v. Herring

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 2, 1984
62 N.Y.2d 1028 (N.Y. 1984)

Opinion

Decided July 2, 1984

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, Robert A. Harlem, J.

Ellen Leary Coccoma for appellant.

Frank W. Getman and Clifton M. Tamsett, Jr., for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

The factual determinations made by the Appellate Division more nearly comport with the weight of the evidence, and we find no error in that court's application of the pertinent rules of law. Plaintiff has failed to show by clear and convincing evidence her entitlement to an easement by implication or prescription.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, JONES, WACHTLER, MEYER, SIMONS and KAYE concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

Abbott v. Herring

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 2, 1984
62 N.Y.2d 1028 (N.Y. 1984)
Case details for

Abbott v. Herring

Case Details

Full title:LEOTA M. ABBOTT, Appellant, v. MERYL A. HERRING, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 2, 1984

Citations

62 N.Y.2d 1028 (N.Y. 1984)
479 N.Y.S.2d 498
468 N.E.2d 680

Citing Cases

U.S. Cablevision Corporation v. Theodoreu

Nor are we persuaded that plaintiff is entitled to an easement by implication, necessity or estoppel. "In…

Stock v. Ostrander

Neither party in this case disputes Supreme Court's findings that plaintiffs established an easement over…